B-2s over South Korea

We could absolutely destroy the North Korean government and military without resorting to nuclear weapons if that option were the best one.

North Korea has a standing Army of 1 million men and is 35 miles from the capital of South Korea. If they get through the DMZ minefield we couldn't even slow them down unless we use nukes. We might be able to bomb all of North Korea back to the stone age, but it wouldn't help Seoul.



Seoul would incur horrific losses due to all the conventional missiles North Korea could unleash at the outset of a hot war, but the DMZ would be a sea of blood if we wanted it to be, and the North would pay for their decimation of Seoul in a most definitive way.

And the South Korean military is not a bunch of pushovers. They are also at least 50 years ahead of the north in military technology. The North has a million malnourished, developmentally-stunted performers who have been convinced that synchronized goose-stepping and TKD forms make for a kick-ass military.

The North Korean army is not malnourished, we send them food pretty regularly.
 
What message?


That we will honor our obligations, defend our allies, and blow your worthless little ass all to hell if you ever make good on your ridiculous threats.

Defend our allies.
Yep - you supported the South Korean dictator after WWII and could never get out of it.
The US of Arse may well cause yet one more war because you forced a local arms race one step too far but remember, China won't want invading US forces on their doorstep and, considering how close Vladivostok is to the NK border, you may well find Russian forces in your way.
You cause the first Korean war by supporting SK's threats against the North, now you're doing it again and are just as likely to get your arses kicked again.

Remember the first one?
You were forced to stalemate but I suppose that's better than your defeats since then.

Do you guys realise, apart from a few places where you were fighting people who had no more than sharpened bananas to fight with, you've lost every war you've started and had thousands of dead troops to show for it?
Think I'm wrong, name an American victory against an armed force. You'll be hard pushed, there isn't one.

A war with NK would be a very messy affair so the body bag manufacturers are doing to love it.
Is there plenty of room in your graveyards or should you invade Mexico to make more space for your dead? :)




All that absolutely false, impotent mewling made neither you nor your armpit country one bit more relevant or significant. Sorry to disappoint you.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of armpit regions populated by human cattle aspiring to be people,
below is one result of shit-for-brains war mongering by filthy god damned chickenhawk scum...
reflectwall2.JPG
 
Last edited:
That we will honor our obligations, defend our allies, and blow your worthless little ass all to hell if you ever make good on your ridiculous threats.

Defend our allies.
Yep - you supported the South Korean dictator after WWII and could never get out of it.
The US of Arse may well cause yet one more war because you forced a local arms race one step too far but remember, China won't want invading US forces on their doorstep and, considering how close Vladivostok is to the NK border, you may well find Russian forces in your way.
You cause the first Korean war by supporting SK's threats against the North, now you're doing it again and are just as likely to get your arses kicked again.

Remember the first one?
You were forced to stalemate but I suppose that's better than your defeats since then.

Do you guys realise, apart from a few places where you were fighting people who had no more than sharpened bananas to fight with, you've lost every war you've started and had thousands of dead troops to show for it?
Think I'm wrong, name an American victory against an armed force. You'll be hard pushed, there isn't one.

A war with NK would be a very messy affair so the body bag manufacturers are doing to love it.
Is there plenty of room in your graveyards or should you invade Mexico to make more space for your dead? :)




All that absolutely false, impotent mewling made neither you nor your armpit country one bit more relevant or significant. Sorry to disappoint you.

Translated - Bugger, I can't name a US victory so I'd better insult him instead. :clap2:
 
Defend our allies.
Yep - you supported the South Korean dictator after WWII and could never get out of it.
The US of Arse may well cause yet one more war because you forced a local arms race one step too far but remember, China won't want invading US forces on their doorstep and, considering how close Vladivostok is to the NK border, you may well find Russian forces in your way.
You cause the first Korean war by supporting SK's threats against the North, now you're doing it again and are just as likely to get your arses kicked again.

Remember the first one?
You were forced to stalemate but I suppose that's better than your defeats since then.

Do you guys realise, apart from a few places where you were fighting people who had no more than sharpened bananas to fight with, you've lost every war you've started and had thousands of dead troops to show for it?
Think I'm wrong, name an American victory against an armed force. You'll be hard pushed, there isn't one.

A war with NK would be a very messy affair so the body bag manufacturers are doing to love it.
Is there plenty of room in your graveyards or should you invade Mexico to make more space for your dead? :)




All that absolutely false, impotent mewling made neither you nor your armpit country one bit more relevant or significant. Sorry to disappoint you.

Translated - Bugger, I can't name a US victory so I'd better insult him instead. :clap2:

The unconditional surrender of the Japanese Empire ending WWII comes to mind.
 
The mistakes made resisting Stalin's programs for expansion were only exceeded by his own. Korea and Vietnam, for example, were very poorly handled.
The US was not alone or unilateral in the Korean conflict. Remember the UN? There were many countries with troops there, including France and England.
 

That fake newspaper meant to be humorous, but does touch upon a possible motivation for the North Korean leader's belligerent posture. He is fearful that he could become ( or already is ) the target of a drone strike assassination attempt orchestrated by the CIA.
A drone attack on Kim Jong Un is his smallest problem because very unlikely.

The main message everybody can get from North Korea´s communiques is that North Korea will not do a first strike. It will not show any weakness by provoking a large scale war.
After the latest troop buildups of the Americans - and this is not limited to the Stealth bombers - it is clear that Kim Jung Un´s message is meant as a deterrent.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top